Phelps Dodge Refining Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 28, 1953

106 N.L.R.B. 1084 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

1084 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
PHELPS DODGE REFINING CORPORATION, EL PASO
PLANTand INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF BOILER-
MAKERS, IRON SHIP BUILDERS, LOCAL 216 and UNITED
BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS & JOINERS OF AMER-
ICA, LOCAL 425 and JOURNEYMEN AND APPRENTICES OF
THE PLUMBING & PIPEFITTING INDUSTRY OF THE U. S.
AND CANADA, LOCAL 231 and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF
OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL 953 and INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, LOCAL 730, AFL, Peti-
tioners and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF MINE, MILL AND
SMELTER WORKERS FOR ITSELF AND ON BEHALF
OF EL PASO COPPER REFINERY WORKERS UNION NO.
501. Cases Nos. 33-RC-440, 33-RC-441, 33-RC-442, 33-
RC-443, 33-RC-446, and 33-RC-454. August 28, 1953
DECISION , ORDER , AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 ( c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, hearings were held before Harold L.
Hudson, hearing officer .' The hearing officer's rulings made
at the hearings are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent
certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of certain employees of the Employer within
the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7)
of the Act.
The Employer and the Intervenor, International Union of
Mine, Mill & Smelter Workers , its Local 501, executed a
contract on July 1, 1951, to expire August 1, 1953. The con-
tract provided for reopening with respect to wages on August
1, 1952, and with respect to all other conditons was to remain
in effect until August 1, 1953, and from year to year unless
notice to modify or terminate was given by either party not
less than 60 nor more than 67 days prior to August 1, 1953.
On August 23, 1952, this agreement was modified and extended
to August 1, 1954. The petitions involved herein were filed
on April 30, May 1, and May 26, 1953. As these petitions
were timely filed with respect to the automatic renewal
clause of the original contract, neither the original contract
nor the supplement is a bar to the proceeding.
4. The Petitioner seeks to sever from a unit of production
and maintenance employees , represented by the Intervenor
i A consolidated hearing was held in Cases Nos . 33-RC-440-443 and 33-RC-446 Case No.
33-RC-454, in which a separate hearing was held, is hereby consolidated with the other cases
for purpose of decision
106 NLRB No. 161
PHELPS DODGE REFINING CORPORATION , EL PASO PLANT 1085
since 1942 , six separate groups of employees contending that
the employees in each of these categories constitute an
appropriate unit of craft employees traditionally recognized
as appropriate for bargaining purposes. At the hearing on the
first five petitions, both the Employer and the Intervenor
contended that the requested units are inappropriate , alleging
that the employees sought are not craftsmen, and further,
that the manufacturing process used is so integrated that no
unit less than plantwide is appropriate . At the hearing on the
petition in Case No . 33-RC-454 , the Employer took no position
on the unit question but the Intervenor made the same con-
tentions as above. The Board has previously considered the
process used in electrolytic copper refineries such as that of
the Employer and has held that neither the nature of the
industry nor the integration of the manufacturing process
precludes the establishment of craft units.'
The Employer is engaged in electrolytic refining of copper
at its plant located at El Paso, Texas . The plant consists of
10 buildings and a total of 650 employees . Administratively
the plant consists of 10 departments , 2 of which are primarily
involved in these cases , the power department and the con-
struction and repair department . Under the assistant works
manager , 1 individual is the department head for both these
departments . He has 1 assistant who is head of the power
department , and 3 assistants in the construction and repair
department, a master mechanic , an assistant master mechanic,
and a labor foreman.
In the power department there are approximately 25 em-
ployees, consisting of 4 station operators , 7 boilermen, 9
electricians , 4 electricians ' helpers, and 1 laborer . However,
only the 4 station operators and the laborer , who does jani-
torial work, perform their duties in the powerhouse building.
In 1952, the Board granted craft severance to the electricians
and electricians ' helpers, but refused to include the station
operators in the electricians ' unit , saying, "The record
shows that , unlike the electricians , these employees are con-
cerned exclusively with operating the employer ' s powerhouse.
A major portion of their time is spent operating the motor
generators , which require only ' minor electrical adjustments'.
As the tasks of these employees do not require the gamut of
skills performed by electrical craftsmen, we shall exclude
them."s Prior to this time, in 1950, the Board refused to
sever the powerhouse department.4
The International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 953,
in Case No. 33-RC-446, now seeks to sever these station
operators and the boiler firemen as craftsmen . Station opera-
tors maintain the powerload as required ; they adjust the output
2Kennecott Copper Corporation , 92 NLRB 1786.
9 Case No. 33-RC-273 , not published in the printed volumes of Board decisions.
4 Phelps Dodge Refining Corporation , 95 NLRB 1024.
1 086 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of the generators to the requirements of the tanks wherein
the electrolytic processing of copper takes place. They are
not licensed operators. They work one on each shift, and have
no assistants ; the extra operator on the afternoon shift is for
the operation of the water treating plant. Station operators are
required to examine and check the generators, auxillary equip-
ment, and all running machinery in the power department
building (powerhouse), replacing or adjusting brushes on
MG sets and charging electric locomotive batteries. All their
duties are performed within the power department building.
Some of the operators, according to the department head, had
a "particular acquaintance and qualification" with their
duties when they were hired; others learned on the job. Boiler
firemen maintain water and steam on the boilers, change
charges on the instruments, check the water treating plants,
replenish chemical feed tanks, and make minor repair on the
boilers and water treating plant. These boilers are customarily
fired by waste heat from reverberatory furnaces located on
the floor below. There is necessarily a need of coordination
between the furnace foreman and the boiler firemen. The
boilers are used for the generation of steam and are located
in the casting department building, a production building, 1
above each furnace, and are operated on a 24-hour schedule
as are the furnaces. In emergencies, auxiliary equipment
may be used to fire the boilers with natural gas as direct
heat.
In view of the separation of the station operators and boiler
firemen in their work, which contributes to the lack of mutual
interest, and in view of the lack of craft skills, we find that
it would be inappropriate to sever the station operators and
the boiler firemen from the existing production and main-
tenance unit.' We shall, therefore, dismiss the petition in
Case No. 33-RC-446.
In the construction and repair department there are approx-
imately 84 employees. All these employees punch timecards
at the main gate, as do all production employees, then they
report to the construction and repair department, also referred
to as the machine shop, for work assignments. The machine
shop is a separate building located on the south side of the
plant, where a department clerk remains at all times main-
taining records and receiving trouble calls from all over the
plant. In the machine shop is located all metal-working
machinery, pipe-threading and welding equipment, the black-
smith forge, carpenter and painter tools, and repair kits for
use in locomotive narrow gauge repair work. All employees
of this department report for duty to this shop and receive
daily assignments throughout the plant. No particular group
has separate supervision.
5 Phelps Dodge Refining Corporation, supra.
PHELPS DODGE REFINING CORPORATION, EL PASO PLANT 1 087
In this department there are 17 labor classifications. Under
one classification, "mechanic A," there are 19 employees
who receive the same rate of pay. From this classification,
4 alleged craft groups are sought by the Petitioners; separate
units of those employees engaged in welding, pipefitting, and
boilermaking duties, and a unit of machinists, mechanics,
and automotive mechanics.
Case No. 33-RC-440: The International Brotherhood of
Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Local 216, alleges that
six mechanic A employees who do steel and iron work pre-
dominantly are craftsmen boilermakers. Their duties are to
maintain the waste heat boilers, repair flues, and do struc-
tural, as well as general, steel repair and maintenance.
However, only one of them is capable of doing actual boiler-
making work and he does not do this work exclusively, as
such work is required only when a boiler is shut down. Other
mechanics A engage in certain iron and steel work when not
engaged in their regularly assigned duties.
Case No. 33-RC-442 and Case No. 33-RC-443: The Journey-
men and Apprentices of the Plumbing & Pipefitting Industry
of the U. S. and Canada, Local 231, alleges that 3 mechanic A
employees who are engaged predominantly in pipefitting duties
and the 3 mechanics A who are predominantly engaged in
welding chores are craftsmen and comprise separate appro-
priate units. A section of the machine shop is assigned to the
mechanics A who do pipefitting work, where they cut and
thread pipe. Some weeks they are particularly busy doing this
work and other weeks there is very little to be done, at which
time they do any work assigned to them. On occasion they
may make repairs on the plant plumbing system. When a
vacancy occurs among this group, the Employer seeks a man
who has done this particular type work. The 3 employees who
are engaged predominantly in welding chores have welding
booths located in the machine shop and also have portable
welding equipment. They do gas and electric arc welding but
are not required to do any pressure welding. When these
employees are not welding, they perform other work assign-
ments . They are not certified welders, but are qualified for
the job the Employer requires.
Case No. 33-RC-454: The International Association of
Machinists, Local 730, AFL, seeks aC unit of "all machinists,
maintenance mechanics, and automotive mechanics," and
indicates that it will take any lesser unit that the Board finds
appropriate. These employees are all classified as "mechanics
A" with the exception of one so-called maintenance mechanic
who is classified as "mechanic B."
Of the mechanics A, two fabricate metal parts for use in
repair and maintenance of plant equipment and spend prac-
tically all their time operating metal-working machinery in
the machine shop. Another has the skill to operate the same
machinery and has done so. He spends half his time within
the machine shop and the balance in various parts of the plant
1 088 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
making mechanical repairs and helping in maintenance work.
One other mechanic A and a mechanic B are engaged in
mechanical maintenance in production areas, and two remain-
ing mechanics A perform repairs and maintenance on narrow
gauge locomotives brought into the shop.
The classification "mechanics A" used by the Employer is,
apparently, a broad term applied to various maintenance
employees. Although certain mechanics A are skilled in
special craft-type work at which they spend a large portion of
their time, the volume of work is insufficient to occupy the
full time of any employee at his particular skill. When not
busy at his special work, he is assigned to any work he is
capable of doing. No formal training program has been estab-
lished by the Employer for these employees and the record
does not indicate that any of them has served an apprenticeship
at any time; neither does it indicate their prior experience.
Although the Employer asserts that these employees do not
do assembly line type of maintenance, they appear to be
specialists in the type of maintenance required by this Em-
ployer, rather than true craftsmen performing highly skilled
work. We do not believe that the record herein, which fails to
show that these employees are highly skilled or that they
have received extensive training or experience in craft work,
justifies a finding that the employees sought are craftsmen
who may be severed from a more inclusive unit.
Accordingly, we find that the proposed units in Cases Nos.
33-RC-440, 33-RC-442, 33-RC-443, and 33-RC-454 are in-
appropriate for collective-bargaining purposes, and we shall
therefore dismiss these petitions.
Case No. 33-RC-441: The United Brotherhoodof Carpenters
& Joiners of America, Local 425, seeks to sever four em-
ployees classified as carpenters in the construction and repair
department. All four were employed as carpenters before
coming to the present Employer and spend their time exclu-
sively in carpentry work. Their work consists of making
concrete forms, replacing woodwork in the tankhouse, painting
loaders and return loaders, and making other wood repair
and replacement in and about the Employer's production
equipment. The work is characterized by the department head
as being rough carpentry such as is required by the Employer,
but concedely one of the carpenters can and does, infrequently,
do finished carpentry work. None is required to do finished
cabinet work. The Employer recognizes these employees as
journeymen carpenters. On these facts the Board finds that
the carpenters may constitute a craft unit if they so desire,
despite a history of collective bargaining on a broader basis.
In view of the foregoing, we shall direct an election among
the carpenters at the Employer's plant at El Paso, Texas,
excluding all other employees and supervisors as defined in
the Act.
The Employer requests the specific exclusion of temporary
construction workers, but inasmuch as the record shows that
LOCKWOOD-DUTCHESS, INC. 1089
no such workers are presently employed or contemplated in
the future, the Board finds such an exclusion unnecessary.
If a majority of the voting group vote for the Petitioner in
Case No . 33-RC-441, they will be taken to have indicated
their desire to constitute a separate appropriate unit , and the
Regional Director conducting the election directed herein is
instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the
Petitioner for the unit described in paragraph numbered 4,
which the Board , under such circumstances , finds to be
appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining . In the event
a majority vote for the Intervenor , the Board finds the
existing unit to be appropriate and the Regional Director will
issue a certification of results of election to such effect.
[The Board dismissed the petitions in Cases Nos . 33-RC-
440, 33-RC-442, 33-RC-443, 33-RC-446, and 33-RC-454.]
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
Member Peterson concurring in part and dissenting in part:
The majority opinion in this case dismisses petitions for
separate units of boilermakers , pipefitters and welders,
machinists , station operators and boiler firemen, and directs
an election among the carpenters . I agree with my colleagues
that the first three groups are not skilled craftsmen and the
units sought are therefore inappropriate . However, with
respect to the station operators and boiler firemen, although
I concur with my colleagues in their conclusion that these
employees are not entitled to separate representation, I do
so only because of the substantial bargaining' history on an
overall basis and the absence of other factors which would
warrant their severance from the established unit ." Further-
more, for these same reasons I disagree with the direction
of an election for the carpenters and also would dismiss
that petition.
Chairman Farmer and Member Rodgers took no part in the
consideration of the above Decision , Order, and Direction
of Election.
6See my dissenting opinion in W. C. Hamilton & Sons , 104 NLRB 627.
LOCKWOOD-D UT CHESS, INC. and TEXTILE WORKERS UN-
ION OF AMERICA , CIO, Petitioner . Case No. 2-RC-5169.
August 28, 1953
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND
CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS OF ELECTION
On November 17, 1952, the Board issued a Decision and
Direction of Election in the above - entitled proceeding. Pur-
106 NLRB No. 166.